Like Dawn of the Dragons Community on Facebook!
Like Dawn of the Dragons Mobile Community on Facebook!

Welcome to Dawn of the Dragons official forums!
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Our 5th Planet Games Cafepress store is now open. You can buy merchandise for Dawn of the Dragons, and for our other fun games too! Visit the store by clicking here.

401 20-E/S/H hits on Kessov: The Demon will Rise WR: http://www.fooby.de/dotd/log.php?id=52303304ef528
Primary objective was getting some basic data on the Bounty Hunter's armor, as well as Shark's Delight. All items were equipped on legion commander.

Slot

Item

Proc count

Proc rate

Damage

Helm

Bounty Hunter's Mask

30

7.48%

8200

Chest

Bounty Hunter's Breastplate

38

9.48%

8200

Legs

Bounty Hunter's Breeches

35

8.73%

8200

Gloves

Bounty Hunter's Gloves

42

10.47%

8200

Boots

Bounty Hunter's Boots

37

9.23%

8200

Main Hand

Shark's Delight

13

3.24 %

266,500

I realize 400 hits isn't nearly enough to nail down an item's proc rate, but frankly, I'm not dedicated enough to give up that much damage testing a clearly inferior armor set, at least not before I reach my total damage target on the WR

I'll update later with more data on Shark's Delight.

700 more 20-E/S/H hits on Kessov: http://www.fooby.de/dotd/log.php?id=52307177c61c5
Mainly looking to continue testing Shark's Delight, and get some preliminary data on a few random things I had gathering dust that seem to be lacking data in the spreadsheet. Everything's equipped on legion commander.

Slot

Item

Proc count

Proc rate

Damage

Helm

Grimsly's Magnificent Monocle

52

7.43%

82000

Chest

Clockwork Cuirass

133 (already /2 for two linked procs)

19%

66625 (total)

Legs

Red Hood Ranger's Breeches

35

5%

71750

Gloves

Infernal Knight's Vambraces

36

5.14%

25625

Boots

Infernal Knight's Schynbalds

37

5.29%

25625

Ring

Carlotta's Fairy

52

7.43%

51250

Main Hand

Shark's Delight

26

3.71%

266500

Oh, do note that all damage values are for a 20-hit. I can go back through and divide by 20.5 if it's desired. Also, if you want, I can go back through my posted saved logs and pull out the counts on the other equipment, which is mostly just Ninja with some Drake-Doom mixed in. Was just too lazy to do it before, and figured those have enough data that additional points aren't a high priority.

Question: Is there an error with the Dragon-Cleaver (Orange), off hand, on the spreadsheet? It should be better than blue and purple I believe.

All it's measuring is the proc from the digits, not the stat boosts. The reason it's lower is because it's data for it's rate averaged lower. All three should actually be the same since their rates should be the same.

All it's measuring is the proc from the digits, not the stat boosts. The reason it's lower is because it's data for it's rate averaged lower. All three should actually be the same since their rates should be the same.

Then something is off since every single one is different has a different max avg damage...

I guess bonus stats vs are bring considered a proc since they sort of are, 100% proc rate vs. Dragons.

Then something is off since every single one is different has a different max avg damage...

That's why I said "should". They "should" be the same, but in the tests of each cleaver, they got different rates. That's going to happen with small tests (which is why the rate text is purple on the doc). They only round to the second decimal place, not to the nearest whole number in the doc, so items that should have the same rate (any different pieces to an armor set for example) will have different listed rates on the doc. If you're going to calculate proc damage for yourself, then I suggest adding up all the rates for a set (for example, all the Drake-Doom item's rates when calculating Drake-Doom procs), averaging them, and rounding to the nearest whole number for a very rough guess.

That's why I said "should". They "should" be the same, but in the tests of each cleaver, they got different rates. That's going to happen with small tests (which is why the rate text is purple on the doc). They only round to the second decimal place, not to the nearest whole number in the doc, so items that should have the same rate (any different pieces to an armor set for example) will have different listed rates on the doc. If you're going to calculate proc damage for yourself, then I suggest adding up all the rates for a set (for example, all the Drake-Doom item's rates when calculating Drake-Doom procs), averaging them, and rounding to the nearest whole number for a very rough guess.

The Proc sheet does not add +Stats vs Certain things [or any +Stats bonus] into the end damage. This would take additional columns [it's already overcrowded], time, and effort that isn't getting factored in.

If someone wants to use the Proc calculations to determine overall damage, they can use the sheet for it. But the sheet needs to have a few constraints.

The Proc sheet does not add +Stats vs Certain things [or any +Stats bonus] into the end damage. This would take additional columns [it's already overcrowded], time, and effort that isn't getting factored in.

On commander, yes. If you're calculating for yourself, then you also have to add in the attack and defense. So, add in (120*5) (5 because the attack and defense are the same, and attack is worth 4 damage, defense is worth 1, 4+1=5) to get 2,498.62. Honestly, I'd round it to 2,500. But, that's if you have 7 Dragonic Digits. It'll be less if you have less than 7 Digits.

On commander, yes. If you're calculating for yourself, then you also have to add in the attack and defense. So, add in (120*5) (5 because the attack and defense are the same, and attack is worth 4 damage, defense is worth 1, 4+1=5) to get 2,498.62. Honestly, I'd round it to 2,500. But, that's if you have 7 Dragonic Digits. It'll be less if you have less than 7 Digits.

Thanks. Just trying to work out optimal dragon stuff and there is so much of it, with so many different combinations, it is, at times, hard to figure it out from the spreadsheet.

I'm trying to make a spreadsheet (will share if it works), to determine the power of my premium. My hope is that having it will let me choose the right one for situations. For example, in besieger's blood, I have Mathias but I'm wondering since many of the troops in it are ranged and Tink seems to have a better proc (although, stats aren't as good), whether it makes more sense to have her in there. From the current spreadsheet, this is pretty hard to determine.

I'd like some confirmation if someone could crunch some numbers. Based on my understanding, Bernard with 209 troops (and no bonus from the current WR) would be an average damage of 2,673.07 and with the boost, 3,393.07. Am I crunching the numbers right?

Thanks. I figured that but since the legion power would be the same for all of the generals, I figured it could be factored out to reduce the complexity.

No. That's not how math works.

If someone has, say, 1000 bonus from just stats, and gives 1500 adps from proc, versus someone with a 2000 bonus from stats and 500 adps from proc, they don't both even out at 2500. The 500% legion bonuses would make it 6000+1500 and 12000+500 = 7500 vs 12500.

If someone has, say, 1000 bonus from just stats, and gives 1500 adps from proc, versus someone with a 2000 bonus from stats and 500 adps from proc, they don't both even out at 2500. The 500% legion bonuses would make it 6000+1500 and 12000+500 = 7500 vs 12500.

The sheet is kinda running out of worthwhile space to add something like this. My intention is to just add the combined stats+proc line. If someone wants to know just the stats, they can either do the math from the stats on the far side, themself, or they can do the math and subtract the stats+proc with the proc beside it.

Edit: Looks like I'm up to only being.... 90 or so posts of data behind in my compilation.... *sigh*.... I'll keep plugging along as I can.

I agree that it's crowded, but I honestly believe the Stat+proc tab is the least useful (and less useful at a glance then just a just a "legion power based on statistics" tab would be) and could be replaced. The unfortunate truth is that a combined tab has almost no meaning at all, because each scale completely differently. The stat function, for value, would have to assume NO legion power bonus to be comparable to the proc bonus (or 105% legion bonus to be comparable to a legion with claudia) and That is simply never the case. The numbers in that tab effectively have no meaning, because you combine apples and oranges in one tab. At least if that tab were replaced by JUST the base legion bonus from stats, somebody can see at a glance how the generals compare to each other on a stat-by-stat basis, and then they can do the simple math of multiplying that number by 100%+(legion bonus) to get that contribution. Because NOBODY using generals with decent procs is going to have no bonus at all, as it stands now you can only glean actual, useful information from that column by subtracting the proc out of it anyway.

By listing the proc and stat legion power completely separate, even without any legion power or claudia boost, it's at least more helpful BOTH at a glance AND for people who are looking to dig a little deeper and math out what they'd get from Claudia and/or legion bonuses.

I'll reiterate, though, what my point actually was: NOT that the sheet actually NEEDS a base legion damage tab, but that a combined tab, due to the nature of scaling of each benefit being completely different, is effectively a useless use of the sheets real estate. I agree with you that is crowded and you don't have much space for MORE information, but I believe it is ineffectively being used on a tab that basically can't mean anything to anybody. Surely you don't look at the combined tab when you pick a general? You'd be better off either picking based on good procs or picking based on stats or doing the math yourself (in many cases, I'll confess, picking the one with the better proc often comes with the same gen with the better stats) but that isn't always the case, and combining them simply has no meaning. That's basically a tab with a formula that calculates nothing anybody can use. It's a great job, and it's not inaccurate, but it can't really help anybody.

I agree that it's crowded, but I honestly believe the Stat+proc tab is the least useful (and less useful at a glance then just a just a "legion power based on statistics" tab would be) and could be replaced. The unfortunate truth is that a combined tab has almost no meaning at all, because each scale completely differently. The stat function, for value, would have to assume NO legion power bonus to be comparable to the proc bonus (or 105% legion bonus to be comparable to a legion with claudia) and That is simply never the case. The numbers in that tab effectively have no meaning, because you combine apples and oranges in one tab. At least if that tab were replaced by JUST the base legion bonus from stats, somebody can see at a glance how the generals compare to each other on a stat-by-stat basis, and then they can do the simple math of multiplying that number by 100%+(legion bonus) to get that contribution. Because NOBODY using generals with decent procs is going to have no bonus at all, as it stands now you can only glean actual, useful information from that column by subtracting the proc out of it anyway.

By listing the proc and stat legion power completely separate, even without any legion power or claudia boost, it's at least more helpful BOTH at a glance AND for people who are looking to dig a little deeper and math out what they'd get from Claudia and/or legion bonuses.

I'll reiterate, though, what my point actually was: NOT that the sheet actually NEEDS a base legion damage tab, but that a combined tab, due to the nature of scaling of each benefit being completely different, is effectively a useless use of the sheets real estate. I agree with you that is crowded and you don't have much space for MORE information, but I believe it is ineffectively being used on a tab that basically can't mean anything to anybody. Surely you don't look at the combined tab when you pick a general? You'd be better off either picking based on good procs or picking based on stats or doing the math yourself (in many cases, I'll confess, picking the one with the better proc often comes with the same gen with the better stats) but that isn't always the case, and combining them simply has no meaning. That's basically a tab with a formula that calculates nothing anybody can use. It's a great job, and it's not inaccurate, but it can't really help anybody.

As I originally responded when I posted it, the Generals+Troops are the trial run to me making the same lines for the gear. Many people have requested such lines for the gear [which will, again, be based on wearing full sets, and no gear boosts].

It's not going to be perfect. But for anyone who is seriously trying to calculate things out, now, they are only looking at the base procs+base bonuses, and the base rates. The rest of it is 'ease-of-use' for casual observers, primarily for comparisons.

It's appreciably great work, but I guess I'll just have to accept it (it's not my sheet, after all, and your work is awesome), but I still feel that this work is not of particular use for anybody (even for somebody playing for free who has no premiums and Claudia, nobody is going to have no legion bonus and so the legion line isn't useful without being simply the base amount, because it's so much more organic than the proc).

That said, while your line about gear makes more sense, even THAT is relatively organic: *everybody* has mounts, which affect your stat damage but not procs: because even that is somewhat more "organic" based on your other stats, combining the attack and defense damage with the proc damage makes almost as little sense there: the proc calc is binary (do you have Zumara?) but the stat calc is significantly more fluid (does your mount add 20% more average damage from your stats? Does it add 40? Do you have Tussao? What is the magic on your raid?) While I'm sure very few people (if anybody) would pick their gear based on whether there is good magic on the raid or not, it STILL makes more sense, even for gear, to have a separate tab for (gear stat damage) and (proc damage) side-by-side. Combining it is another case of apples to oranges that is functionally not helpful to anybody.

I hope I get across enough just how fundamentally I disagree with the "usefulness to work ratio" you have set up, and I also hope right alongside it I can get across just how much that doesn't mean I don't appreciate the awesome work you do.

Right now it has all items, troops and generals with base stats and max procs. Somethings have bonuses added and premiums have their stats based on how many feeder items you own. It then factors in your bonuses from mounts/magics/legion bonus/if you are using zumara/claudia/etc. You will need to make your own copy in order to get full use since you need to enter your own stats (legion bonus/mount bonus/magic bonus/etc.)

On commander, yes. If you're calculating for yourself, then you also have to add in the attack and defense. So, add in (120*5) (5 because the attack and defense are the same, and attack is worth 4 damage, defense is worth 1, 4+1=5) to get 2,498.62. Honestly, I'd round it to 2,500. But, that's if you have 7 Dragonic Digits. It'll be less if you have less than 7 Digits.

Tweak pointed this out a while back, but the Dragon-Hewer(OH) should be *7 digits for the max average damage instead of the *8 it's currently listed at. It's also missing the notes that the the Dragon-Cleaver's(OH) have about the bonus.

Some other typos for main hand:
Gleaming Glory(main) has 'For each additional Green Knight set item equipped' in the note of the average bonus damage #1, should be 'vs. demons'
Apprentice Librarian's Books(main) has 'additional piece of Animated gear worn' in the note of the average bonus damage #1, should be 'for each additional Apprentice Librarian item equipped'
Amor Terriblis(main) should be corrected to Amor Terribilis
Sword of Conquered Kingdoms V1(main) note of the average bonus damage #1 just has the number 2, should be 'per Sword Fanatic owned, capping at +500'
Sword of Conquered Kingdoms V2(main) note of the average bonus damage #1 says 'per Sword Fanatic owned, capping at +500' should be 'per Sword Fanatic owned, capping at +1000'

Also wanted to know how much perception is needed to reach the cap for the clockwork items. Anyone know?